Model Based Torque Converter Clutch Slip Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">To realize better fuel economy benefits from transmissions, car makers have started the application of torque converter clutch control in second gear and beyond, resulting in greater demand on the torque converter clutch (TCC) and its control system. This paper focuses on one aspect of the control of the torque converter clutch to improve fuel economy and faster response of the transmission.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">A TCC is implemented to control the slip between the pump and turbine of the torque converter, thereby increasing its energy transfer efficiency and increasing vehicle fuel economy. However, due to the non-linear nature of the torque converter fluid coupling, the slip feedback control has to be very active to handle different driver inputs and road-load conditions, such as different desired slip levels, changes in engine input torques, etc. This non-linearity requires intense calibration efforts to precisely control the clutch slip in all the scenarios.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">In this paper, a model based control method is developed to calculate the feedforward portion of the pressure control signal. This feedforward pressure calculation is so accurate that when it is used in conjunction with the slip feedback signal, the control of the torque converter clutch becomes extremely effective in controlling the slip to desired small values and at the same time preventing clutch flares and lock ups. The proposed feedforward algorithm applies the Kotwicki model or an equivalent table lookup to predict torque across the clutch using the desired slip, current estimated engine torque, and turbine speed. This new control strategy provides more accurate control, and reacts faster during the transient conditions, such as engine torque changes and reference slip changes. The strategy has been applied and demonstrated in various torque converters in both RWD and FWD GM transmissions.</div></div>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".